waters off Georgia and northern Florida. Most whales sighted 

 during the winter calving period are within five miles of shore, 

 occasionally no more than a few yards from the beach. 



Because of their occurrence in coastal waters, right whales 

 are exposed to human activities and environmental pollution more 

 than pelagic species. Of particular concern in this regard are: 

 collisions between whales and ships and disturbance by vessel 

 traffic; entanglement in active and lost and discarded fishing 

 gear and other marine debris; dredging and dredge spoil disposal 

 in important right whale habitat; disturbance by whale watching 

 boats; noise and disturbance from activities associated with 

 offshore oil and gas exploration; oil spills from tanker traffic; 

 and pollution from ocean dumping, municipal outfalls, and 

 industrial discharges. 



As described in previous Annual Reports, the Commission has 

 supported several studies and workshops on right whales. Among 

 other things, these efforts sought to improve information on 

 right whale habitat use patterns (e.g. , Winn 1984 and Winn et al . 

 1985 in Appendix B and Brownell et al. 1986 in Appendix C) and to 

 identify research and management needs (e.g. , Kraus 1986 in 

 Appendix B and The Georgia Conservancy 1986 in Appendix C) . 

 Congress also has recognized the need for better information on 

 the status of and threats to the northwest Atlantic Ocean right 

 whale population. In 1986, it appropriated $500,000 to the 

 National Marine Fisheries Service to develop a research program 

 on northwest Atlantic right whales and each year since then it 

 has appropriated $2 50,000 to carry that program forward. 



As noted in previous Annual Reports, the Commission has 

 recommended on several occasions that the National Marine 

 Fisheries Service constitute a recovery team and prepare a 

 recovery plan for right whales as required by the Endangered 

 Species Act. In response, the Service constituted a Recovery 

 Team in July 1987. Among other things, the Team was asked to 

 review a draft Recovery Plan which the Service had developed and 

 provided to the Team in May 1988. At its initial meeting on 30 

 November-2 December 1988, the Recovery Team concluded that the 

 Draft Plan would require substantial revisions and additions. It 

 was agreed, therefore, that the Recovery Team would develop and 

 submit to the Service a revised recommended draft recovery plan. 



By fall 1989, a draft recovery plan had not been released 

 for agency or public review and, on 19 October 1989, the 

 Commission wrote to the Service asking to be advised as to the 

 Service's schedule for developing and adopting a Recovery Plan. 

 By letter of 14 November, the Service replied, noting that there 

 had been delays in receiving materials from the Recovery Team and 

 that it was exploring ways to expedite the process. At the end 

 of 1989, it was the Commission's understanding that a draft plan 

 would be available for review early in 1990. 



57 



